CAVC Case 01-1536: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · October 3, 2002 · KRAMER, Chief Judge
This is a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims — the federal court that reviews Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions, one level above the Board. Court decisions can vacate, reverse, or affirm what the Board did.
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Conditions Claimed
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
BackHearing LossTinnitusEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
KRAMER, Chief Judge: The appellant appeals, through counsel, an August 7, 2001, decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board or BVA) that determined that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen his claim for service connection for right-ear hearing loss and that denied his claim for service connection for tinnitus.
The RO, in a March 1999 letter, informed the appellant that he needed to submit new and material evidence, showing that his condition was incurred in or aggravated by service, to reopen his hearing-loss claim.
In a July 22, 1999, decision, the RO, inter alia, determined that the appellant had not submitted new and material evidence to reopen his claim for service connection for hearing loss, right ear, and denied as not well grounded his claim for service connection for tinnitus.
Under new section 5103A, the Secretary's duty to assist a claimant includes, inter alia, "providing a medical examination or 3 obtaining a medical opinion when such an examination or opinion is necessary to make a decision on the claim.
§ 5103A "shall be construed to require the Secretary to reopen a claim that has been disallowed except when new and material evidence is presented or secured.
Regarding these items of evidence, the Board concluded, inter alia, that, because such evidence did not establish a nexus between the appellant's current hearing loss and his period of active service, it was not material evidence (R.
On appeal, the appellant argues in essence that VA failed to fulfill its duty to assist him under 38 U.
, his testimony at two hearings, VA was required to provide him with a medical examination or to obtain a medical opinion addressing whether there is a nexus between each of his current disabilities and his active service.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
No Nexus|Not New Material|Duty To Assist
Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →